From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 26 15:04:38 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FD41106566B; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 15:04:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from matt@xtaz.co.uk) Received: from mail.xtaz.co.uk (xtaz.co.uk [87.194.206.163]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1FB78FC13; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 15:04:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vw0-f54.google.com (mail-vw0-f54.google.com [209.85.212.54]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: gmail) by mail.xtaz.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EC90EB07647; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 16:04:04 +0100 (BST) Received: by vws11 with SMTP id 11so7369218vws.13 for ; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 08:04:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.107.102 with SMTP id hb6mr6261071vdb.419.1317049440268; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 08:04:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.167.194 with HTTP; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 08:04:00 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20110926142114.GC57708@in-addr.com> References: <20110926132923.GB57708@in-addr.com> <20110926142114.GC57708@in-addr.com> Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 16:04:00 +0100 Message-ID: From: Matt Smith To: Gary Palmer Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: gif interface not passing IPv6 packets X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 15:04:38 -0000 On 26 September 2011 15:21, Gary Palmer wrote: > Smells like a routing table problem or similar configuration problem. > On my tunnel endpoint, admitedly running 7.4 not 8.x or head, pings > to the LOCAL endpoint of the gif0 tunnel go over lo0, not the external > interface (gif0). =A0I believe that is true for all IPv4 or IPv6 traffic. Interesting. You could be right then. But I still don't understand what could have changed as the rc.conf configuration for this is identical to what it was before the power cut. The deprecated part just makes the outgoing source address algorithm favour the vr0 address, but the same happens no matter if I include that or not. ipv6_enable=3D"YES" ipv6_ifconfig_vr0=3D"2a01:348:294::1 prefixlen 64" gif_interfaces=3D"gif0" gifconfig_gif0=3D"192.168.1.2 77.75.104.126" ipv6_ifconfig_gif0=3D"2a01:348:6:45c::2 2a01:348:6:45c::1 prefixlen 128 deprecated" ipv6_defaultrouter=3D"2a01:348:6:45c::1" ipv6_gateway_enable=3D"YES" rtadvd_enable=3D"YES" rtadvd_interfaces=3D"vr0" Which produces: vr0: flags=3D8843 metric 0 mtu 1500 options=3D82808 ether 00:40:63:e8:79:3e inet 192.168.1.2 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.1.255 inet6 fe80::240:63ff:fee8:793e%vr0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1 inet6 2a01:348:294::1 prefixlen 64 nd6 options=3D3 media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX ) status: active gif0: flags=3D8051 metric 0 mtu 1280 tunnel inet 192.168.1.2 --> 77.75.104.126 inet6 fe80::240:63ff:fee8:793e%gif0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x5 inet6 2a01:348:6:45c::2 --> 2a01:348:6:45c::1 prefixlen 128 depreca= ted nd6 options=3D3 options=3D1 Destination Gateway Flags Netif Expire ::/96 ::1 UGRS lo0 =3D> default 2a01:348:6:45c::1 UGS = gif0 ::1 ::1 UH = lo0 ::ffff:0.0.0.0/96 ::1 UGRS = lo0 2a01:348:6:45c::1 2a01:348:6:45c::2 UH = gif0 2a01:348:294::/64 link#1 U = vr0 2a01:348:294::1 link#1 UHS = lo0 The interesting thing is I've just got the routing table from my friends working server with similar configuration except his is just a tunnel without any subnet and his has this: Destination Gateway Flags Netif Expire ::/96 ::1 UGRS lo0 =3D> default 2a01:348:6:45d::1 UGS = gif0 ::1 ::1 UHL = lo0 ::ffff:0.0.0.0/96 ::1 UGRS = lo0 2a01:348:6:45d::1 link#3 UHL = gif0 2a01:348:6:45d::2 link#3 UHL = lo0 I'm wondering why there are clearly significant differences here. If my configuration didn't work before then I can accept that I've screwed up in some way but it's worked for months so I don't understand what's changed now. Unfortunately I don't know what my routing table looked like originally when it worked but I'm thinking for some reason when the box boots it's building the routing table differently to how it was before now?